Anatomy of a Modern Rug Pull: The Ink-Bleed Effect in On-Chain Data

Rug pulls have evolved significantly since the early days of DeFi. Modern attackers employ sophisticated techniques to evade detection, but their on-chain footprints remain identifiable to trained systems.

The Evolution of the Rug Pull

In 2021, most rug pulls were simple: deploy a token, add liquidity, wait for buyers, remove liquidity. Today's attacks are far more nuanced.

We're seeing attackers use 50+ intermediate wallets, time-delayed withdrawals, and even legitimate-seeming trading activity to mask their intent.

Identifying the Ink-Bleed Pattern

The "Ink-Bleed" pattern occurs when stolen funds attempt to legitimize themselves by mixing with clean transactions. Here's what we look for:

• **Velocity Anomalies**: Sudden bursts of small transactions from new wallets
• **Graph Density**: Unusual clustering of wallet interactions
• **Temporal Signatures**: Transactions occurring at suspicious intervals

Case Study: The $2.3M DEX Drain

In December 2024, we identified and marked a contract that would later drain $2.3M from a popular DEX. Our system flagged it 47 hours before the attack executed.

The key indicator? The deployer wallet had a second-degree connection to 14 previously-stained addresses, despite appearing clean on surface-level analysis.

Protecting Your Protocol

Integrating with StainNet means you're not just checking addresses—you're analyzing the entire network of relationships that an address has touched.